| Literature DB >> 27881116 |
Óscar M Tavares1,2, João Valente-Dos-Santos1,3,4, João P Duarte1, Susana C Póvoas5, Luís A Gobbo6, Rômulo A Fernandes6, Daniel A Marinho7, José M Casanova8, Lauren B Sherar9, Daniel Courteix10,11,12, Manuel J Coelho-E-Silva13.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A variety of performance outputs are strongly determined by lower limbs volume and composition in children and adolescents. The current study aimed to examine the validity of thigh volume (TV) estimated by anthropometry in late adolescent female volleyball players. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) measures were used as the reference method.Entities:
Keywords: Adolescent female athletes; Body composition; Deming regression; PRESS
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27881116 PMCID: PMC5122194 DOI: 10.1186/s12887-016-0730-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pediatr ISSN: 1471-2431 Impact factor: 2.125
Descriptive statistics for the total sample of female adolescent volleyball players (n = 42) and test of normal distribution
| Range | Mean | SD | Kolmogorov-Smirnov | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value | 95% CI | SE | Value | P-value | |||
| Training (years) | 2-8 | 4.21 | 3.57-4.85 | 0.32 | 2.85 | 0.113 | 0.200 |
| Training sessions (#) | 30-129 | 92.5 | 85-100 | 3.7 | 24.1 | 0.132 | 0.062 |
| CA (years) | 14.00-18.76 | 16.76 | 16.40-17.12 | 0.18 | 1.16 | 0.091 | 0.200 |
| Age at menarche (years) | 10.75-15.67 | 12.72 | 12.44-13.00 | 0.14 | 0.90 | 0.097 | 0.200 |
| CA – age at menarche (years) | 1.46-6.39 | 4.04 | 3.67-4.41 | 0.18 | 4.41 | 0.088 | 0.200 |
| Stature (cm) | 154.8-175.6 | 165.2 | 163.5-166.9 | 0.9 | 5.5 | 0.093 | 0.200 |
| Body mass (kg) | 47.5-88.1 | 61.1 | 58.2-64.0 | 1.4 | 9.4 | 0.145 | 0.026 |
| Skinfold thigh anterior (mm) | 14-38 | 24.7 | 23.0-26.4 | 0.8 | 5.4 | 0.111 | 0.200 |
| Skinfold thigh posterior (mm) | 17-42 | 26.3 | 24.2-28.5 | 1.1 | 6.9 | 0.148 | 0.022 |
CA chronological age, CI confidence intervals for the mean, SE standard error of the mean, SD standard deviation
Thigh volume estimates by anthropometry and by dual X-ray absorptiometry in female adolescent volleyball players (n = 42) and test of normal distribution
| Range | Mean | SD | Kolmogorov-Smirnov | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value | 95% CI | SE | Value |
| |||
| TV-ANTH (L) | 3.67-8.49 | 4.91 | 4.59-5.23 | 0.16 | 1.03 | 0.157 | 0.011 |
| TV-DXA (L) | 4.17-8.00 | 5.55 | 5.27-5.83 | 0.14 | 0.90 | 0.123 | 0.113 |
TV-ANTH thigh volume estimated by anthropometry, TV-DXA thigh volume estimated by dual X-ray absorptiometry, CI confidence intervals for the mean, SE standard error of the mean, SD standard deviation
Fig. 1Regressions between body mass and estimates of thigh volume by anthropometry (TV-ANTH) and by dual X-ray absorptiometry (TV-DXA) in female volleyball players aged 14-18 years (n = 42). The standard error of estimation (Sy∙x), correlation (R) and coefficient of determination (R 2) are also presented
Fig. 2Deming regression between estimates of thigh volume by anthropometry (TV-ANTH) and by dual X-ray absorptiometry (TV-DXA) in female volleyball players aged 14-18 years (n = 42). The standard error of estimation (Sy∙x), correlation (R), confidence intervals for the correlation (CI) and coefficient of determination (R 2) are also presented
Regression model to obtain log-transformed estimates of thigh volume in female adolescent volleyball players and internal cross-validation analysis for the new model using PRESS
| Xi | Intercept and predictors | Model summary | PRESS | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| SEE | P-value | Partial- | VIF | 1/VIF |
| SEE |
|
|
| SEE | |
| Intercept | -0.899 | 0.153 | <0.001 | 0.922 | 0.027 | 0.851 | 0.843 | 0.838 | 0.027 | |||
| log10 (body mass) | 0.876 | 0.108 | <0.001 | 0.810 | ||||||||
| log10 (TV-ANTH) | 0.113 | 0.081 | 0.172 | 0.138 | 0.386 | 2.589 | ||||||
TV-ANTH thigh volume estimated by anthropometry, β, beta unstandardized, SEE standard error or estimate, r and R: correlation, VIF variance inflation factor, 1/VIF tolerance, R 2 coefficient of determination, R adj 2: adjusted coefficient of determination
Fig. 3Linear least product regressions between estimates of thigh volume and relationship between residuals and the mean of the concurrent estimates in female volleyball players aged 14-18 years (n = 42). Estimates of thigh volume by anthropometry-based new model (TV-NM) and by dual X-ray absorptiometry (TV-DXA, panel a). Differences between anthropometry-based new model (TV-NM) and reference given as dual X-ray absorptiometry (TV-DXA, panel b). The standard error of estimation (Sy∙x), correlation (R and r), coefficient of determination (R 2), upper limits of agreement (ULOA) and lower limits of agreement (LLOA) are also presented
Thigh volume estimates by the anthropometry-based new model and by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry in female adolescent volleyball players, mean differences between methods and paired t-test (n = 42)
| Methods | Differences | Paired | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TV-DXA | TV-NM | ||||||||
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | 95%CI | SD | t(df=41) | P-value | |
| Thigh volume (L) | 5.545 | 0.858 | 5.553 | 0.899 | -0.899 | -0.108–0.092 | 0.322 | 0.160 | 0.873 |
TV-DXA thigh volume estimated by dual X-ray absorptiometry, TV-NM thigh volume estimated by anthropometry-based new model, SD standard deviation, CI confidence intervals for the mean differences